On Sun, 17 May 2009 09:13:30 +0200
Robert Luberda <rob...@debian.org> wrote:
> > > % ls -l /dev/vbidefault
> > > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root video 8 May 15 20:02 /dev/vbidefault
> > > -> /dev/vb1
>
> Oh, shouldn't the link point to /dev/vbi1? I don't think /dev/vb1
> exists on your system.
Checking:
% ls -l /dev/vb*
crw-rw----+ 1 root video 81, 224 May 19 10:45 /dev/vbi0
crw-rw----+ 1 root video 81, 225 May 19 10:45 /dev/vbi1
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root video 8 May 19 14:49 /dev/vbidefault ->
/dev/vb1
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root video 8 May 19 14:49 /dev/vbisecondary ->
/dev/vb0
% ls -l /dev/vb1
ls: cannot access /dev/vb1: No such file or directory
Well, the cause was a typo in one of my local setup scripts:
ln -fs /dev/vb$N /dev/vbidefault
(And so I've corrected that script. Not very often a maintainer fixes my
bug. Thanks!)
> > > % readlink -f /dev/vbidefault
> > > /dev/vb1
> > >
> > > % realpath /dev/vbidefault ; echo $?
> > > /dev/vbidefault: No such file or directory
> > > 1
>
>
> I've just created some link to non-existent file and reproduced your
> report, but wouldn't however consider it as a bug. It's an expected
> behaviour of realpath, which should fail on missing files.
It should fail, it should... and yet, if the error message
read:
/dev/vb1: No such file or directory
...it wouldn't have confused me long, I could have tested it with
'ls -l' and might have immediately seen the problem. Needless to say
symlinks are files, (small files); the symlink '/dev/vbidefault'
did exist, so the current (indirect) error perplexed (me).
> ...Anyway, many thanks for your bug report and finding the difference
> between `readlink -f' and `realpath' I haven't been aware of. I will
> document it in man page in the next version of realpath.
Very glad to "help", and more thanks for explaining how a user mistake
had an OK side effect.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
